1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant’s unpaid leave disposition against the Plaintiff as of July 5, 2010, and as of July 12, 2010.

1. The reasons for this part of this Court's reasoning are as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, in addition to the phrase "Evidence Nos. 1 through 8, 31, 36, 37, 37, 68, 77, and 81" written in Section 6 of Article 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance, since this part of this Court's reasoning is the same as stated in Section 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. Determination as to the defendant's assertion that the lawsuit of this case has no interest

A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the instant unpaid leave disposition for which the Plaintiffs seek to confirm the invalidity of the instant lawsuit is the legal relationship in the past that has already been completed, and there is no existing apprehensions with the Plaintiffs due to the above unpaid leave disposition

Therefore, the plaintiffs' lawsuit of this case has no interest in confirmation.

B. 1) Although a lawsuit for confirmation is permitted to eliminate risks or apprehensions in relation to the current rights or legal status, even in the past legal relations, if it is affected by the current rights or legal status, and it is deemed an appropriate means to obtain a judgment on confirmation of the said legal relations in order to eliminate risks or apprehensions in the current rights or legal status (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da36407, Oct. 14, 2010). However, according to the facts and evidence acknowledged earlier, the Plaintiffs appears to have suffered legal disadvantage that they would not receive wages from the Defendant during the pertinent period of temporary retirement from office due to the instant temporary retirement from office, and the instant unpaid temporary retirement from office is deemed to have the substance of the disposition that did not receive wages during the pertinent period of temporary retirement from office against the Plaintiffs.

Therefore, the unpaid leave disposition of this case is affected by the current rights or legal status as to the existence of each of the plaintiffs' respective rights to claim wages, and thus, it is in the instant unpaid leave disposition.